What kind of discipline is psychoanalysis?

References

• Ahumada JL (1994). Interpretation and creationism. Int J Psychoanal 75:695–707.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altmann de litvan M, editor (2014). Time for change: Tracking transformations in psychoanalyses – the three‐level mode. London: Karnac.
   Google Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 5th edition: DSM‐5. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Assoun PL (1982). Introducción a la epistemología freudiana [Introduction to Freudian epistomology] (Vol. 2). México, DF: Siglo XXI.
   Google Scholar
• Aulagnier P (1979). Les destins du plaisir [The destinies of pleasure]. Paris: Presses Universitares de France.
   Google Scholar
• Baranger M (1993). The mind of the analyst: from listening to Interpretation. Int J Psychoanal 74:15–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baranger W, Baranger M (2008). The analytic situation as a dynamic field. Int J Psychoanal 89:795–826.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baranger M, Baranger W, Mom JM (1983). Process and non‐process in analytic work. Int J Psychoanal 64:1–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernardi R (1989). The role of paradigmatic determinants in psychoanalytic understanding. Int J Psychoanal 70(Pt 2):341–57.
   Google Scholar
• Bernardi R (1995). Sobre el determinismo psíquico. Revista Uruguaya de Psicoanálisis 81:65–88.
   Google Scholar
• Bernardi R (2002). The need for true controversies in psychoanalysis: The debates on Melanie Klein and Jacques Lacan in the Rio de la Plata. Int J Psychoanal 83:851–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernardi R (2003). What kind of evidence makes the analyst change his/her theoretical and technical ideas? In: Leuzinger‐bohleber M, Dreher AU, Canestri J, editors. Pluralism and Unity? Methods of research in psychoanalysis 125–36. London: The International Psychoanalytical Association.
   Google Scholar
• Bernardi R (2010). DSM‐5, OPD‐2 y PDM: Convergencias y divergencias entre los nuevos sistemas diagnósticos psiquiátricos y psicoanalíticos. Rev Psiquiatr Urug 74:179–205.
   Google Scholar
• Bernardi R (2013). Observing transformations in patients: The assessment of mental functioning. Int J Psychoanal 94:1170–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernardi R (2014a). The assessment of changes: Diagnostic aspects. In: Altmann M, editor. Time for change: Tracking transformations in psychoanalysis – the three‐level model, 263–78. London: Karnac.
   Google Scholar
• Bernardi R (2014b). The three‐level model (3‐LM) for observing patient transformations. Altmann M, editor. Time for change: Tracking transformations in psychoanalysis – the three‐level model, 3–34. London: Karnac.
   Google Scholar
• Beutel ME, Stark R, Pan H, Sibersweig D, Dietrich S (2010). Changes of brain activation pre‐post short‐term psychodynamic inpatient psychotherapy: An fMRI study of panic disorder patients. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging 184(2):96–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bion WR (1992). Cogitations. London: Karnac.
   Google Scholar
• Blass RB, Carmeli Z (2007a). Reply to Drs Mancia and Pugh. Int J Psychoanal 88:1068–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blass RB, Carmeli Z (2007b). The case against neuropsychoanalysis. Int J Psychoanal 88:19–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bleger J (1971). Psicología de la conducta [Conduct psychology]. Buenos Aires: Centro Editor de América Latina S.A.
   Google Scholar
• Canestri J, editor (2006). Psychoanalysis: From practice to theory. London: John Wiley and Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Canestri J, editor (2012). Putting theory to work: How are theories actually used in practice?. London: Karnac.
   Google Scholar
• Carhart‐harris LA, Mayberg HS, Malizia AL, Nutt D (2008). Mourning and melancholia revisited: correspondences between principles of Freudian metapsychology and empirical findings in neuropsychiatry. Annals of General Psychiatry 7(9). http://www.annals-general-psychiatry.com/content/7/1/9
   Google Scholar
• Carmeli Z, Blass RB (2013). The case against neuroplastic analysis: a further illustration of the irrelevance of neuroscience to psychoanalysis through a critique of Doidge's the brain that changes itself. Int J Psychoanal 94:391–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper AM (2008). American psychoanalysis today: A plurality of orthodoxies. J Am Acad Psychoanal Dyn Psychiat 3:235–53.
   Google Scholar
• Davidson D (1994). Filosofía de la psicología. Barcelona: Anthropos [(1980). Essays, actions and events. Oxford: Oxford UP].
   Google Scholar
• De león de bernardi B (2013). Field theory as a metaphor and metaphors in the analytic field and process. Psychoanal Inq 33:247–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eagle M, Wolitzky D (2011). Systematic empirical research versus clinical case studies: A valid antagonism? JAPA 59(4):791–818.
   Google Scholar
• Etchegoyen RH (1999). Un ensayo sobre la interpretación psicoanalítica [An essay on psychoanalytic interpretation]. Buenos Aires: Ed. Polemos.
   Google Scholar
• Etchegoyen RH (2001). Algo más sobre el testeo del proceso clínico [Something more on testing the clinical process]. Subjetividad y procesos cognitivos [Subjectivity and cognitive processes] 1:34–59.
   Google Scholar
• Etkin A, Phil M, Pittenger C, Polan J, Kandel ER (2005). Toward a neurobiology of psychotherapy: Basic science and clinical applications. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 17:145–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonagy P, Roth A, Higgitt A (2005). The outcome of psychodynamic psychotherapy for psychological disorders. Clin Neurosci Res 4:367–77.
   Google Scholar
• Fonagy P, Target M (1994). The efficacy of psychoanalysis for children with disruptive disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 33:45–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fonagy P, Target M (1996). Predictors of outcome in child psychoanalysis: A retrospective study of 763 cases at the Anna Freud Centre. J Am Psychoanal Assoc 44:27–77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freud S (1900). The interpretation of dreams. SE 4:ix–627.
   Google Scholar
• Freud S (1914). On narcissism: An introduction. SE 14:73–102 [Introducción del narcisismo (Vol. XIV). Buenos Aires: Amorrortu Editores].
   Google Scholar
• Freud S (1915). Instincts and their vicissitudes. SE 14:117–40 [Pulsiones y destinos de pulsión. Buenos Aires: Amorrortu Editores].
   Google Scholar
• Glass R (2008). Psychodynamic psychotherapy and research evidence: Bambi survives Godzilla? JAMA 300(13):1587.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green A (1983). La mère mort. In: Narcissisme de vie, Narcissisme de Mort, 222–54. Paris: Minuit.
   Google Scholar
• Green A (1986). The dead mother. In: On private madness. London: Hogarth Press [La mère mort. In: Narcissisme de vie, Narcissisme de Mort. Paris: Minuit, 1983, 222–54].
   Google Scholar
• Green A (1999). Consilience and rigour: Commentary by André Green (Paris). Neuropsychoanalysis: An Interdisciplinary Journal for Psychoanalysis and the Neurosciences 1(1):40–4.
   Google Scholar
• Green A (2002). La pensée clinique [Clinical thinking]. Paris: Odile Jacob.
   Google Scholar
• Green A (2005a). Ideas directrices para un psicoanálisis contemporáneo. Desconocimiento y reconocimiento del inconsciente. Buenos Aires: Amorrortu editores [Key ideas for a contemporary psychoanalysis. London: New Library of Psychoanalysis].
   Google Scholar
• Green A (2005b). The illusion of common ground and mythical pluralism. Int J Psychoanal 86:627–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hampe M (2003). Plurality of sciences and the unity of reason. In: Leuzinger‐bohleber M, Dreher AU, Canestri J, editors. Pluralism and unity? Methods of research in psychoanalyisis. 45–62. London: International Psychoanalysis Association.
   Google Scholar
• Hanly CM (1990). The concept of truth in psychoanalysis. Int J Psychoanal 71:375–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanly CM (1992). Inductive reasoning in clinical psychoanalysis. Int J Psychoanal 73:293–301.
   Google Scholar
• Hanly CM (1995). On facts and ideas in psychoanalysis Int. J. Psychoanal 76:901–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hobson JA (2002). Dreaming: An introduction to the science of sleep. Oxford: Oxford UP.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman IZ (2009). Doublethinking our way to “scientific legitimacy”: The desiccation of human experience. JAPA 57:1043–69.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffman IZ (2012). Response to Eagle and Wolitzky. JAPA 60:105–19.
   Google Scholar
• Hoffmann M (2005). ¿Hay una lógica de la abducción? Texto del 4/11/05 http://www.unav.es/gep/AN/Hoffmann.html
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez JP (2007). Can research influence clinical practice? Int J Psychoanal 88:661–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kächele H, Schachter J, Thomä H (2008). From psychoanalytic narrative to empirical single case research: Implications for psychoanalytic practice. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Keats J (1958) The Letters of John Keats. Rollins HE, editor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
   Google Scholar
• King P, Steiner S, editors (1991[1943]). The Freud–Klein Controversies 1941–1945 (Vol. 11). London: Tavistock/Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lakatos I (1970). La historia de la ciencia y sus reconstrucciones racionales [The history of science and its rational reconstructions]. In: Lakatos I, Musgrave A, editors. La crítica y el desarrollo del conocimiento [Criticism and the development of knowledge], 455–510. Barcelona: Grijalbo.
   Google Scholar
• Laplanche J (1991). L'interpretation entre déterminisme et herméneutique: une nouvelle position de la question [Interpretation between determinism and hermenuetics: a different positon on the matter]. Rev. Franç. Psychanal 5:1294–371.
   Google Scholar
• Laudan L (1977). Progress and its problems: Towards a theory of scientific growth. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leibovich de duarte A (2000). Más allá de la información dada: cómo construimos nuestras hipótesis clínicas [Beyond the given information: how we construct or clinical hypotheses]. Revista de la sociedad Argentina de psicoanálisis 3:97–114.
   Google Scholar
• Leichsenring F (2009). Psychodynamic psychotherapy: A review of efficacy and effectiveness studies. Handbook of evidence‐based psychodynamic psychotherapy, 3–27. Boston: Humana Press.
   Google Scholar
• Leichsenring F, Rabung S (2008). Effectiveness of long‐term psychodynamic psychotherapy: A meta‐analysis. J Am Med Assoc 300:1551–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leuzinger‐bohleber M, Fischmann M (2006). What is conceptual research in psychoanalysis? Int J Psychoanal 87:1355–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leuzinger‐bohleber M, Stuhrast U, Rüger B, Beutel M (2003). How to study the quality of psychoanalytic treatments and their long‐term effects on patient's well‐being: A representative, multi‐perspective follow‐up study. Int J Psychoanal 84:263–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nederbragt H (2012). Multiple derivability and the reliability and stabilization of theories. In Soler L, Trizio E, Nickles T, Wimsatt W, editors. Characterizing the robustness of science: After the practice turn in philosophy of science. Boston studies in the philosophy and history of science (Vol. 292, 121–46). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• OPD Task Force, editor (2008). Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis OPD‐2. Manual of Diagnosis and Treatment Planning. Cambridge: Hogrefe and Huber Publishers [Diagnóstico Psicodinámico Operacionalizado. OPD‐2. Barcelona: Herder].
   Google Scholar
• Panksepp J (1999a). Drives, affects, id energies, and the neuroscience of emotions response to the commentaries. NeuroPsychoanalysis 1:69–89.
   Google Scholar
• Panksepp J (1999b). Emotions as viewed by psychoanalysis and neuroscience: An exercise in consilience. NeuroPsychoanalysis 1:15–38.
   Google Scholar
• Parloff MB (1982). Psychotherapy research evidence and reimbursement decision: Bambi meets Godzilla. Am J Psychiatry 139(6):718–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton MQ (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• PDM Task Force (2006). Psychodynamic diagnostic manual. Silver Spring, MD: Alliance of Psychoanalytic Organizations.
   Google Scholar
• Pichon‐rivière E (1998a). El proceso grupal: del psicoanálisis a la psicología social [The group process: from psychoanalysis to social psychology]. Buenos Aires: Nueva visión.
   Google Scholar
• Pichon‐rivière E (1998b). Teoría del vínculo [Theory of binding] (Vol. 19). Buenos Aires: Nueva Visión.
   Google Scholar
• Poeppel D, Embick D (2005). The relation between linguistics and neuroscience. In: Cutler A, editor. Twenty‐first century psycholinguistics: Four cornerstones. 103–20. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Quintanilla P (1999). La hermenéutica de Davidson: metáfora y creación conceptual I [Davidson's Hermeneutics]. In: Caorsi C, editor. Ensayos sobre Davidson [Essays on Davidson]. 75–98. Montevideo: Fundación de Cultura Universitaria.
   Google Scholar
• Reik T (1968). Theodor Reik speaks of his psychoanalytic technique. Amer. Imago 25:16–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sackett DL, Straus SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W (1997). Evidence‐based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM. New York: Churchill Livingstone.
   Google Scholar
• Safran JD (2010). Discussion by Jeremy D. Safran. Panel discussion on “clinical and empirical issues: disagreements and agreements. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Rapaport‐Klein Study Group, Austen Riggs Center, Stockbridge, MA. http://www.psychomedia.it/rapaport-klein/SafranOnHoffman-2010.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sandell R (2012). Research on outcomes of psychoanalysis and psychoanalysis‐derived psychotherapies. In: Gabbard GO, Litowitz. Be, Williams P, editors. Textbook of psychoanalysis, 2nd edn., 417–37. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Sandell R, Blomberg J, Lazar A, Carlsson J, Broberg J, Schubert J (2000). Varieties of long‐term outcome among patients in psychoanalysis and long‐term psychotherapy: A review of findings in the Stockholm Outcome of Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy Project (STOPPP). Int J Psychoanal 81:921–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandler J (1983). Reflections on some relations between psychoanalytic concepts and psychoanalytic practice. Int J Psychoanal 64:35–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandler J, Sandler AM, Davis R, editors (2000). Clinical and observational psychoanalytic research: Roots of a controversy (Vol. 5). London: Karnac.
   Google Scholar
• Shedler J (2010). The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. American Psychologist 65(2):98–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shevrin H (1995). Is psychoanalysis one science, two sciences, or no science at all? A discourse among friendly antagonists JAPA 43(4):963–86.
   Google Scholar
• Solms M (2013). The conscious id. Neuropsychoanalysis 15:5–19.
   Google Scholar
• Solms M, Turnbull O (2002). The brain and the inner world. An introduction to the neuroscience of subjective experience. New York: Other Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stern D, Sander L, Nahum J, Harrison A, Lyons‐ruth K, Morgan A, Tronick E (1998). Non‐interpretive mechanisms in psychoanalytic therapy: The “something more” than interpretation. Int J Psychoanal 79:903–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stern DN (2004). The present moment in psychotherapy and everyday life. New York: W. W. Norton and Co.
   Google Scholar
• Strenger C (1991). Between hermeneutics and science. Madison, CT: International Universities Press.
   Google Scholar
• Target M, Fonagy P (2002). Fathers in modern psychoanalysis and in society. The role of the father and child development. In: Trowell J, Etchegoyen A, editors. The importance of fathers: A psychoanalytic re‐evaluation, 45–66. East Sussex: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Toulmin SE (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: University Printing House.
   Google Scholar
• Toulmin SE (2001). Return to reason. London: Harvard UP.
   Google Scholar
• Van eemeren FH (1993). Reconstructing argumentative discourse: Tuscoloosa, AL: UAP.
   Google Scholar
• Van Eemeren FH, Grooterndorst R (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma‐dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
   Google Scholar
• Wallerstein RS (1988). One psychoanalysis or many? Int J Psychoanal 69:5–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallerstein RS (1990). Psychoanalysis: the common ground. Int J Psychoanal 71:3–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallerstein RS (1992). The common ground of psychoanalysis. Northvale, NJ: Aronson.
   Google Scholar
• Wallerstein RS (2005a). Dialogue or illusion? How do we go from here? Response to André Green. Int J Psychoanal 86:633–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallerstein RS (2005b). Will psychoanalytic pluralism be an enduring state of our discipline? Int J Psychoanal 86:623–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallerstein RS (2009). What kind of research in psychoanalytic science? Int J Psychoanal 90:109–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whewell W (1858). Novum Organon Renovatum. London: John W. Parker.
   Google Scholar
• Zimmermann J, Ehrenthall JC, Cierpka M, Schauenburg H, Doering S, Benecke C (2012). Assessing the level of structural integration using operationalized psychodynamic diagnosis (OPD): implications for DSM‐5. Journal of Personality Assessment 94(5):522–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar